previous sub-section
Representations of Power before and after Thucydides
next chapter


1. Note that gifts need not be pleasant: in many cultures, not only gifts but insults and revenge are exchanged only between equals. The response to an affront can thus constitute a recognition of equality, just as silence can loudly proclaim disdain. On this, see Bourdieu 1977, 10–15. [BACK]

2. Finley 1975, 174. [BACK]

3. Ste. Croix 1972, 109. [BACK]

4. Raaflaub 1985, 84, 89 n. 91. [BACK]

5. Cartledge 1987, 11. [BACK]

6. Peculiar but not unique: contrast, for example, the serfs of Thessaly and Crete, whom Aristotle compares to the Spartan helots (Pol. 1269a35ff.); on the serfs of Thessaly, see Archemachos of Euboea, FGrH 424 frag. 1 (Ath. 6.264a-b); on the Maryandynoi, serfs at Herakleia Pontika, see Poseidonios, FGrH 87 frag. 8 (Ath. 6.263d); Strabo 12.3.4; Ste. Croix 1980, 138–139. [BACK]

7. See. Thuc. 1.18.1, where Thucydides says that Sparta was “from the earliest times subject to eunomia (eunomêthê).” [BACK]

8. Finley 1975, 164. [BACK]

9. Thus, at Thuc. 2.39.1, Perikles snipes at xenêlasia, Sparta’s practice of driving away foreigners to preserve secrecy; cf. also the Athenian criticisms leveled at Thuc. 1.77.6; at 9.11.2, Herodotus remarks that the Spartans refused to distinguish between “barbarians” and Greeks who were not Spartan, referring to all non-Spartans, Greek or not, as “strangers” (xeinoi). [BACK]

10. E.g., Hdt. 1.138.2, 2.172.3; when Sophokles’ Ajax applies this verb to his contemplated “admiration” of the Atreids (667), the language underlines his bitter sarcasm. [BACK]

11. On the linguistic similarities between Arkadian and the language of Linear B, see Duhoux 1983, 41–44; Duhoux comments that, despite all the controversy about the relationship between Mycenaean and classical Greek, there is general consensus that Arkado-Cypriote had the closest connection to Mycenaean of any later dialect group (p. 42). It would appear that the speakers of Mycenaean Greek held out in the poor but rough fastnesses of Arkadia. [BACK]

12. The classic passages attesting to this are the Corinthian complaints at Thuc. 1.70 and Archidamos’s defence at 1.84. [BACK]

13. Note the apologetic tone of the Mytileneans at Thuc. 3.9–14, who concede that, for all their suspicions, they had received honor from the Athenians in peacetime (ἐν τῇ εἰρήνῃ τιμώμενοι ὑφ’ αὐτῶν even though they elsewhere point out that the Athenians had least to fear from their allies during peace (3.12.1). [BACK]

14. See, for example, Hornblower 1992. [BACK]

15. Xen. Lak. Pol. 1.1: ta epitêdeumata tôn Spartiatôn; Hornblower 1983, 105. [BACK]

16. See 1.8.3; cf. 1.76.2, 77.3; note also Thucydides’ reinterpretation of Agamemnon’s leadership against Troy at 1.9.3. [BACK]

17. Fornara and Samons 1991, 125. [BACK]

previous sub-section
Representations of Power before and after Thucydides
next chapter